Over dinner with a friend the other night the subject of relationships came up, how fanciful they seemed, how they managed to avoid us so adeptly and how relationships are often a struggle of power between two people with deep seated emotion for one another. We were playing the ever-mature game of ‘Would You Rather?’ but committed to actually answering with one of the options, and not coming up with a third unrelated-but-fitting-to-my-circumstances answer that bitches use to ruin this otherwise flaw-free game.
It wasn’t so much a hilarious dilemma as it was a probing question into my attitude towards relationships (what a Debbie Downer). Gone were the questions about whether we’d prefer ejaculate in the hair or eye, instead replaced by a question of transient importance, one that would define my character in his eyes for the next 15 minutes to come whereafter we’d be back on the questions about deformed genitals and elderly sex partners. The question was, in a couple was I more likely, or would I prefer to be a reacher or a settler? A reacher, would be someone who dated ‘above their average’ meaning to say, in some way or form they don’t ~deserve~ the person that they are currently dating. A settler on the other hand would be a person too lazy to seek out a partner of relative beauty and attractiveness, instead settling upon a mate whose best attribute may be that they were reliable and almost servant-like.
While we’d all like to think that in a relationship the two parties have the same amount of enamour for one another I’d hazard a guess to say that this situation is pretty rare. I’m fairly certain the only documented case of this might be between the mirror and myself. It is often easy to identify the reacher and the settler in any given couple. Sometimes it’s a bit harder, take Courtney Stodden for example, in cases like that it’s hard to tell who is who, kind of like an alien experiment in human fusion gone wrong. I had to think carefully about my decision. There were hidden perils in aligning myself with either side.
To be a reacher would be to publicly declare my self-loathing and low self esteem. While I do this in private with my friends Adele, Tim and Tam it’s not something that I’d like to wear proudly as a badge. It asserts that, you as a person, are completely leave-able. To be a settler would be a declaration to the world that you are a lazy bitch who has become accustomed to people doing things for you. A settler settles because they know that they’ll be able to get away with more with their partner than they would with someone of equivalent TRV (Total Relationship Value) (not a real measurement).
So which one did I choose? In the end I chose to be a reacher, and while I realise this is a highly hypothetical, non-real, inconsequential decision that doesn’t mean the rest of my life is doomed to be turned over in relationships like the hot side of a pillow during a nap, the answer resonated a few home truths about me as a person; That I’d like to think that I’d always prefer to put more effort in to a relationship than let myself get complacent about the person I’m dating, and that I wouldn’t let the fear of being rejected or hurt paralyze me into surrendering to a bad relationship for security’s sake.
But seriously would you rather an extra penis or no face?